I have got to concede the point to NL and FS, the 101 is not JAR29 certified per se but uses JAR29 as the basis for certification following the FAR29 and BCAR cert in 94, if the comment had read 'It is the only aircraft in its class certified to the latest standard of the rigorous FAA Part 29 requirements', it would have been clearer.
Crab: I dont know where your info comes from but you are confused about aircraft procurement, qualification and RTS.
The spec to which any item is designed is promulgated by the relevant IPT on behalf of the user.
The manufacturer designs and qualifies the aircraft to meet a spec, this is overseen by the relevant IPT (NOT the user). Thus the IPT are the customer and the auditor of the design from a compliance point of view. The IPT are MoD staff and hence not constrained by commercial concerns.
In the case of Merlin WHL have determined that the aircraft is both safe to fly and spec compliant and that info has been given to the IPT after approval by the design staff, airworthiness staff and the Engineering director.
The fuselage distortion on shutdown comment is completely unfounded and we ought to know, if you manage to get a copy of the WHL lims document you will see that as far as we (the designers after all) are concerned the aircraft can land on severe slopes with significant cross winds without trouble, please do not accuse us (yes I work for WHL) of not having the interests of the user at heart, flightsafety is paramount and we would not promulgate a 'release' for a knowingly deficient aircraft.
In the sad case of the UK the IPT have decided that the design Release to service (RTS) which is issued by the ACAS is based on Recommendations from QinetiQ who are now a commercial organisation, every 'fault' they find gives them more work and more profit....(conflict of interest?)
The RTS for both Merlin variants is an agreed incremental approach, between us, the RAF, the IPT and QQ (who have the most to lose by recommending a full MAR quickly, less work etc) and we have generally met our programme dates, ask QQ why they only schedule 12 hrs a month of flying when we achieve 24, thats the delay in MAR production.
Composites are not the same as metal, you have to treat them differently, from your location I guess you are involved in the SK 3A at chivenor, so 21st century technology might appear strange to you.
The initial Merlin deliveries had some teething troubles (as all new A/C do, comments from the early users of Tornado would be interesting) but it was all agreed by the customer (not you, the IPT, any grievances should be directed at them, they audit us and were happy).
As for being unhappy with the 101 as a SAR cab, talk to the canadians about their recent experiences or read Defence Helicopter. If you are happy with the SK and think that a 150 kt cruise with an deliberate icing clearance, 3 FADEC engines, 50 kt cross wind hover capability, properly designed NVG 'glass' cockpit and a cabin you can get a landrover in aren't an improvement you really are deluded.
As to the quality of our products and we are a protected company what is flying at Shawbury, what is flying at Odiham, why is the Apache flying at Middle Wallop instead of letting us do our own A/C (remember Lynx3?). Dont forget August 1986...(400 kph level without compounding ). The Canadians (twice), Portuguese, RAF, RN, MMI, Danish and Japanese can't all be wrong can they?
On the positive side thanx for the comment on the Lynx MGB, the workshare years ago was decided on by WHL and Agusta (if I recall during our problem period) and they got the MGB, c'est la vie, anyway in the 101 case the MGB is perfectly OK as is, we have OEI CAT A performance at well above MAUM, three engines are better than two, less dead weight to carry around to cope with losing 1/2 your power instead of 1/3, similarly 4 is better than 3! I would be interested in the SK and S92 Cat A performance penalties as a comparison (didn't Flight International say that to achieve CAT A behaviour the S92 loses 1000kg in AUM?)
To sum up, do some research and get yourself a flight at Benson before commenting.
The 101 looks great in USMC colours.....